beyond content and pedagogy: challenges of the hs physics teacher bradley gearhart, buffalo public...
TRANSCRIPT
Beyond Content and Pedagogy: Challenges of the HS Physics Teacher
Bradley Gearhart, Buffalo Public Schools, MST #197 [email protected] MacIsaac, Buffalo State College [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Teacher preparation programs are charged with providing pre-service physics teachers solid conceptual and pedagogical foundations to draw upon in their classroom instruction. However, in an authentic setting, content and pedagogy are but two strands in the thread of teaching as a profession. Navigating teacher evaluation systems, state standards, diverse student populations, building politics, logistical details, and various other facets of the profession are essential to maintaining a lasting career in teaching. My experience has shown that these are often overlooked aspects that are largely left “as an exercise for the reader.” Drawing upon my experience as a physics teacher at a private catholic, a public suburban, and a public urban high school, I attempt to outline the responsibilities and concerns of the high school physics teacher while offering some perspective on the preparation of these teachers for the purpose of obtaining, and maintaining, a career in the profession.
This project was supported by Buffalo State College, and the National Science Foundation (NSF)* funded Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering Partnership (ISEP) MSP project.
WHO AM I?
Over the past 10 years, I have had the opportunity to teach in a full spectrum of educational environments. After receiving a B.S. in Physics from Rochester Institute of Technology in 2004, I shifted my focus to physics education and received a M.S.Ed. in Physics Education with Alternative Certification from Buffalo State College in 2009. My teaching career includes teaching in private, public suburban, and public urban school districts, having received tenure in each of the three districts. I currently teach at Math Science Technology Preparatory School in Buffalo, NY. Additionally, I have been employed as a Master Physics Teacher since 2009 at Buffalo State College, instructing Modeling Physics courses during the summer.
The courses I taught depended significantly on student enrollment, class size, and the certification of other teachers in the science department. Several times, my lack of additional STEM certifications (Biology, Earth Science or Chemistry) put my job in jeopardy due to low enrollment in physics courses and state certification requirements that limited the classes I was legally allowed to teach. Content and pedagogy learned through my undergraduate and graduate education provided a solid foundation upon which my physics teaching was constructed. However, since much of the pedagogy was demonstrated through physics content specifically and I lacked background understanding in other sciences, the quality of my teaching in areas outside physics was significantly flawed. Regardless of my years of experience, teaching outside of physics left me feeling like a first year teacher and unhappy with my ability to teach other science content
Teacher evaluations have undergone significant revision in the past three years with the passing of Education Law §3012-c in New York State. This new legislation directly ties student performance on high stakes examinations to teacher evaluations used in the determination of continued employment. Education Law §3012-c requires districts to enact an Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR) for teachers, from which 40% is determined by student performance on end of year state exams.
The APPR process has been applied identically across all districts in New York State regardless of student populations. Some changes have been made for districts with high populations of ELL and special education students, in addition to those with high poverty rates. Teachers choose target scores for students on final exams as early as October (one month into the school year) without any adjustments made based on the student’s absenteeism throughout the remainder of the year. Students that do not achieve or exceed the teacher selected target score count against a teacher's APPR score. Additionally, teacher are penalized for students that choose not to take the final exam with the student counting against the teacher in the determination of their final APPR score.
* This activity was sponsored by the Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering Partnership (ISEP), NSF-MSP project DUE-1102998. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Graphics Credit: Ann Gearhart 2015All information presented in this document is original content produced by Bradley Gearhart and may not be reproduced without permission.
WHAT DO I TEACH?
WHO DO I TEACH?
HOW AM I EVALUATED?
Class ObservedBackground of
Observer
1st Year
Regents Chemistry
Former Guidance Counselor
2nd Year
Regents PhysicsFormer Physics
Teacher
3rd Year
Regents PhysicsFormer English
Teacher
4th Year
Regents PhysicsFormer Physical
Education Teacher
5th Year
Regents PhysicsFormer English
Teacher
6th Year
Regents PhysicsFormer Physical
Education Teacher
7th Year
Environmental Science
Former Math Teacher
8th Year
Conceptual Physics
Former Math Teacher
9th Year
Medical Physics Former ESL Teacher
10th Year
Conceptual Physics
Former Science Teacher
SALARY BY SCHOOL
YEARLY BUDGET ANDCLASSROOM RESOURCES